and ordered the annulment of the entry, the annulment of the original birth certificate registered in the city of San Vicente, and the registration of a new birth certificate with the name of Gregoria Herminia Recinos Contreras. In addition, on July 18 and 19, 2012, a new identity document and a new passport were provided free of charge, neither of which make any reference to her previous identity. The State also advised that it was coordinating the future correction of her identity in the records of the Republic of Guatemala, and to this end was notarizing the documentation issued in El Salvador under the procedure to restore her identity. The said documentation would be sent to the competent authority, through the Consulate General of El Salvador in Guatemala, so that the necessary judicial and administrative measures could be taken. In this regard, the State indicated that, on August 28, 2011, prior to the judgment of the Inter-American Court, the Consul General of El Salvador in Guatemala, a lawyer from the Human Rights Directorate of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and a lawyer from the Asociación Pro-Búsqueda had held a meeting in Guatemala City with the Attorney for Children and Adolescents of the Attorney General’s Office in Guatemala, and that, during this meeting, they were informed of the procedural channels for rectifying birth certificates in Guatemala and obtained an initial expression of institutional collaboration. In addition, on August 28, 2011, a meeting was held with the Director of the Guatemalan National Civil Registry (RENAP) to coordinate the administrative stage of the process of rectifying entries in the Republic of Guatemala. Nevertheless, the State underscored that “the result of any kind of judicial or administrative proceedings in [that] country does not depend on these measures and that it also requires the active participation of the interested party.” 24. The State also reported that it had received, through the representatives, the expression of the wish of Gregoria Herminia Recinos Contreras to return to El Salvador, indicating as necessary conditions that she be provided with a house in San Salvador in which she, her husband and three children can live in decent conditions, and which has adequate safety conditions, in an area near a school, and with a space where her husband can set up a silkscreen workshop. In addition, they referred to immigration aspects to ensure that her husband and children, of Guatemalan nationality, can live and work in El Salvador. In this regard, the State assumed its obligation under the Judgment, which would be implemented as follows: psychosocial assistance adapted to her needs and the payment of the expenses of moving the victim and her family. In addition, the State considered it basic to assume the support and coordination required to regularize any migratory aspect in El Salvador of the victim, as a Salvadoran citizen, and her family. However, the State had offered possible dwellings in the zone of Lourdes Colón, La Libertad, which the victim had declined because there was insufficient space for installing her husband’s business. She had been offered ownership of the said dwelling, without the cost it would have for the population in general, and the State remained willing to provide a house under the same terms and conditions. Furthermore, at the request of the victim and her representatives, it was also exploring the possibility of a house in the department of San Vicente, the place of residence of Serapio Cristian Contreras. 25. The representatives acknowledged that the judicial proceeding required to rectify the identity of Gregoria Herminia Recinos Contreras had been held in the Second Family Court of Santa Ana. However, they considered that the State should increase coordination measures with the Republic of Guatemala owing to the fact that the measures reported corresponded to August 2011, in other words, a year and a half ago. This was because, since the restitution of the victim’s identity, there were concerns about the legal situation of her children, because it would affect their school enrollment, in addition to other aspects that could also be affected, such as that she would be unable to leave the country with her children unless she was accompanied by her husband. In this regard, they asked the Court to find that this measure of reparation had been complied with partially and to require the 10